EPTCommunity Update - January 22, 2018 - Page 9
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
JackONeill
861 Posts
| ||
|
MockHamill
Sweden1798 Posts
On January 30 2018 06:00 JackONeill wrote: Well RIP raven once again. Without a defensive ability the unit will be absolutely and utterly worthless. I do not agree. Interference matrix is now good vs Protoss, anti-armor missile is good vs Zerg and turrets is ok as an early defense or harass tool. Old Raven with pdd was of course stronger but the Raven is stronger now compared to pre-patch. | ||
|
JackONeill
861 Posts
On January 30 2018 06:49 MockHamill wrote: I do not agree. Interference matrix is now good vs Protoss, anti-armor missile is good vs Zerg and turrets is ok as an early defense or harass tool. Old Raven with pdd was of course stronger but the Raven is stronger now compared to pre-patch. Without a defensive ability, the raven doesn't do its job. No PDD => tempest hard counter mech on their own + corruptors shred vikings No repair drone => parabomb and storms wreck vikings | ||
|
ReachTheSky
United States3294 Posts
On January 30 2018 08:34 JackONeill wrote: Without a defensive ability, the raven doesn't do its job. No PDD => tempest hard counter mech on their own + corruptors shred vikings No repair drone => parabomb and storms wreck vikings Vikings get shredded my parabomb even if repair drone is a thing. Repair drone only helps a single unit at a time and has limited energy. | ||
|
JackONeill
861 Posts
On January 30 2018 11:06 ReachTheSky wrote: Vikings get shredded my parabomb even if repair drone is a thing. Repair drone only helps a single unit at a time and has limited energy. Yes, and the repair drone's design is horrible anyway. Mech relies on ressources to maintain its forces with repair, allowing a energy for health spell was stupid. However 1 raven can cast 2 repair drones that effectively negate the damage they're taking from parabomb. That's not much, but it's something. The auto turret helps in no way in that regard. I'm glad the repair drone is gone, but the raven won't do its job with scrambler/turret/shredder. | ||
|
Tyrhanius
France947 Posts
On January 30 2018 08:34 JackONeill wrote: Without a defensive ability, the raven doesn't do its job. No PDD => tempest hard counter mech on their own + corruptors shred vikings No repair drone => parabomb and storms wreck vikings It's not because you don't know how to split vikings or land them when PB is used, or hit and run with vikings vs corruptors, it's a balance issue. Mech is already a joke in term of skill cap/powerfulness, with basically just sieging tanks/a moving hellbats/cyclon/thor, the air manage is maybe the only thing mech player has to do. | ||
|
MockHamill
Sweden1798 Posts
I did some testing pre-patch, I think the result was that is better to keep the thors in single damage mode most of the time, but now when the radius is larger maybe it is worth it? Against armored targets, it does increase the splash damage by 50% (60% if the target has 1 native armor, 75% if target has 2 native armor) compared to not using the armor debuff. DPS wise if you hit a single armored target that has the armor debuff you are about equal if they have no native armor. Against both 1 and 2 native armor you do more DPS is splash mode (combined with the armor debuff) as long as you hit at least 2 targets (compared the single target air attack). I am not sure how this works in practice though since when you use the single target mode you can focus down units, which does not work as well when you use the splash mode. | ||
|
engesser1
264 Posts
Where is Peace on Earth? | ||
|
Mahanaim
Korea (South)1002 Posts
On January 31 2018 20:46 MockHamill wrote: Has anyone tested if the new anti-armor missile makes it worth it to combine with the thor splash air attack instead of the single target air attack? I did some testing pre-patch, I think the result was that is better to keep the thors in single damage mode most of the time, but now when the radius is larger maybe it is worth it? Against armored targets, it does increase the splash damage by 50% (60% if the target has 1 native armor, 75% if target has 2 native armor) compared to not using the armor debuff. DPS wise if you hit a single armored target that has the armor debuff you are about equal if they have no native armor. Against both 1 and 2 native armor you do more DPS is splash mode (combined with the armor debuff) as long as you hit at least 2 targets (compared the single target air attack). I am not sure how this works in practice though since when you use the single target mode you can focus down units, which does not work as well when you use the splash mode. That's a good point. Those two probably would synergize well. | ||
|
mishimaBeef
Canada2259 Posts
| ||
|
Ransomstarcraft
75 Posts
In the beginning of SC2, Protoss was the race that had to rely on turtling to a certain technology in order to have the strength to win the game. Colossus and Templar are the two most obvious examples of this. Conversely, Zerg was the race that needed to have map control to know what mix of its numerous yet weak masses of units to build in order to surround and crush the opponent. The original design for Terran was all about space control. Terran was the defensive race, taking locations and then forcing an opponent to move in and attack their fortified location. Meanwhile, Terran should always be harassing with its variety of versatile harassment units. The unfolding and various redesigns of Protoss and Zerg up to this point have changed the identities of these races. Protoss now has "infantry" basically, and can rely on Gateway builds to an extent by massing Chargelots and harassing with the powerful Warp Prism while teching. Mass Chargelot along with a smattering of Templars and Archons is viable as well with the current strength of Chronoboost on upgrades. Zerg, meanwhile, can turtle and drone while staying on Queens and Zerglings in order to get to a desired tech. Hydras and Ultralisks are the most common choice. The strength of Hydras means Zerg no longer has to respond to their opponent as much, they can build this unit and use it in all scenarios while gaining a better tech choice as well. Add to this that the design team has worked to give Zerg options for unexpected aggression throughout the game that means an opponent must be prepared for various attacks such as single-overlord drops and invincible Nydus Worms. Terran, at this point, does not seem to have a unified vision from the design team. I think this is because of two main problems with Terran units overall. 1. Terran Mechanical Units generally have two modes: A powerful mode with a certain weakness and a vulnerable mode with generally no discernible strength. Examples: A. Siege Tanks while in siege mode have great space control, but are vulnerable to close range attacks as well as air-to-ground attacks. B. Hellions have decent map control and decent splash damage but low hit points, Hellbats have decent splash damage but terrible speed. Neither of these units excels at its job, even when massed. C. Vikings have decent anti-air attack power, but landed vikings have no real role other than to not be useless when there are no air units. Vikings originally dominated the air. Currently, they do not at all and even if you dedicate yourself to building vikings, a 70 drone Zerg can in one or 2 cycles make enough corruptors to shut you down comlpetely. When it was decided that Corruptors had no role in a ground game, they gained a building attack. The servos upgrade is an effort to change this, but so far it has simply made Vikings and Hellions a little less useless, not useful. D. The Liberator is a powerful air-to-ground attacker that is immobile and vulnerable while sieged, but its air-to-air capability is now severely limited. Point 1: Both modes of units that transform need to be useful in some way. They do not have to cover everything, but there needs to be a situation where one might go "Some landed Vikings/Hellbats/Air Liberators would really be helpful right now." I would have thought that the original idea behind having mechanical units transform was flexibility for various situations, but what it has become in general is "this is the good mode"... "this is the bad mode". 2. Some Terran units have simply been left behind the design/balance process. By this I mean, since there is no overall identity to Terran and there seems to be a commitment not to give Terran "tanking" units, certain units have no definite place in the game and no real reason to build them as part of a unit composition. A. The widow mine originally gave the Terran powerful space control with the added power of the enemy being unable to discern how many mines were present and when they were going to reactivate because they remained invisible while rebuilding. (Keep in mind that the 2 units Terran gained in HOTS were the Widow Mine and the Hellbat. This will be a major support to my overall point in a moment.) B. The Cyclone originally was designed to be a unit that would virtually guarantee a Terran could stay alive through the early game with its powerful single target damage with movement. Now the unit is a very expensive, somewhat tanky unit that has no place in a game that goes longer than five minutes. C. The Raven once exemplified Terran's identity: a defensive powerhouse. Unfortunately, when massed this unit made for ridiculous situations. D. The Reaper was once a unit that could serve as a scout or, with an upgrade, a powerful harassment unit. Now it is pigeon-holed into a "build 1 per game" type unit that may or may not get the information needed to live through the early game. E. Bunkers do not do their job for defense, and bunker rushing is now absent from the game, meanwhile cannon rushing/proxy gates and early pool/fast Ravager builds are viable. Point 2: The overall identity to Terran seems to be leaning towards heavy mobility for Bio or strong standing power with Mech, but many of the units don't support either of these identities, and thus Terran unit compositions are predictable and easily countered. The compositions are either Marine/Marauder/Medivac or Hellion/Tank/Viking/Thor. Other units (with the exception of the Liberator) do not synergise well with these and can easily be overrun by units that are near impossible to counter such as Carriers, Brood Lords, Immortals, Mass Zealots, etc. It just seems very strange to watch a Terran with 500 apm managing three sets of drops and being countered at each place by Zealots with charge and better upgrades. I would think those who complain about "massing tier 1 units" might agree. I say all this because I think the issue with Terran design lies with these two major points: 1. Terran units that transform should have strengths and weaknesses for each mode, not just one. 2. Terran units that have been left behind need a role in a unified vision for the Terran race. Some will say that I'm asking too much, but what has happened for both Zerg and Protoss is that the balance team has creatively given each race Offensive and Defensive capabilities in the Early, Mid, and Late game. Terran does not have this. Also, please keep in mind that while I may have mentioned balance here or there that this is a design thread and I am speaking about design. My opinion is that Protoss and especially Zerg are more comprehensively and better designed right now. My hope for the immediate future is versatility for Terran, not buffs for the core units I've mentioned as having their place already. | ||
|
seemsgood
5527 Posts
Do not hesitate blizzard give us warhound back by remove cyclone's armor tag.I want to hear protoss players whine about mech... JUST FOR ONCE.. Landed viking is easy to fix tho.Just give it ability to shot air while in ground mode.This buff alone is enough to make goliath whine from terran players stfu and severely reduce prsi storm + PB strength. | ||
|
scartissue555
7 Posts
For instance, let's say we're starting a game versus protoss. Oh, you want to make a Mech-based army? Tanks, Goliath and such? Good luck with that, protoss have a SLEW of anti-armor units that will utterly destroy you. Don't bother investing all of your +1 +2 +3 upgrades into mech .... Zealots, Stalkers, Immortals will crush them and The unit trade is terrible. So we can't invest in Mech. Okay, so ... let's go Bio. Well, you better have some BYUN type of control now with your Bio if the game gets to mid-game/late game. Templar and storms will literally evaporate your entire army if your ghosts don't EMP them correctly or if you make a mistake. Oh, you forgot to make vikings? Colossus are going to tear your bio army to SHREDS! It just seems like the terran is constantly trying to adapt make units to counter the protoss and protoss control the game. Don't even get me started on how many times I hear "oh .. you shouldn't have let protoss get that far. need to kill them early." That's stupid .. races should be balanced as time progresses. Also, skytoss? Once they get 10 carriers and the mothership and storm - good luck, nothing will beat it except battlecruisers yamatoing and then running away. And its a long ... game ... Oh and Protoss with Chrono-boosting their upgrades? You have a deadly army running into your base with +3 +3 before you can say "yikes." Against Zerg none of this is a problem. Terran can mech and have a fair game. Terran can bio. Game is normal. Protoss versus Terran is ridiculous. My two cents. | ||
|
MrFreeman
207 Posts
On January 25 2018 02:29 Tyrhanius wrote: You can build extra orbitals and use call down mules to repair your army anywhere on the map  Yep, that was my strategy b4 and what I've switch back to. It only costs me minerals to get them and the extra scans are really nice, but oh man, the free repair was so great and saved me so much gas and kept so many units alive. But maybe I've misread this and blizzard was in truth worried that repair drone might become too strong, rather than too unpopular. PS: I wish there was a way for mules to have auto-repair on by default, but I guess that isn't an option, right? I just have to turn it on each time... | ||
| ||
.
